many people are worried about. >> mr. speaker, can my right honorable friend tell the house what action he is taking to introduce rigor into our education system and the situation of the last government when 22% of students studied proper academic studies? >> well, i think the education secretary is doing a superb job focusing on schools on the results including english and math and the baccalaureate that includes subjects that employers and colleagues really value and doing some forward and straightforward things that weren't done for 14 year that punctuation and grammar actually count when you do an exam. >> considering the prime minister met with a family yesterday will he now reflect of the comments made in relation to that particular meeting and the outcomes and the agreements made at the westin park talks in 2001

by both governments that there should be an independent public inquiry? >> of course, i reflected what i said yesterday and i've reflected on this whole issue for many months since pm prime minister. and i profoundly believe that the right thing for the family and for ireland and everyone for of everyone in the united kingdom would not have a public inquiry but for the british government to do the really important thing which is to epion up and tell the truth about what happened 22 years ago. we don't need an inquiry to do that. that's why my right honorable friend the northern ireland secretary will make a statement explaining exactly how we're going to do this and who is involved. the greatest healer of truth and an apology for what's happened. that's what's happened. let's not have another saddle process to get there and do the right thing. >> thank you, mr. speaker, will my right honorable friend join

me in welcoming the news that he will be released and this could go a long way for peace in the area. >> i think if anyone reflects on what that young soldier has been through for those weeks, months, years, it is just something that i think anyone in this house would find difficult to contemplate. and if it is the case that he's going to be coming home soon, i wish him and his family and everyone well. >> order, the statement the secretary of state for northern ireland, mr. secretary patterson. this is an extremely important matter. can i appeal to --

>> c-span radio is another way to keep up with politics and public affairs offering a mix of the most relevant events from the three c-span television networks. and some exclusives like the re-air of the sunday news programs from the major networks. if usual in washington, dc, listen to us at 90.1 fm. across the country on xm satellite radio channel 119. and on our iphone and blackberry apps. c-span radio, another public service created by the nation's cable television industry and now in our 15th year.

>> the senate finance committee yesterday approved free trade agreements with south korea, panama and colombia setting the stage for votes in the full house and senate later today. supporters expect the trade deals to boost u.s. exports by $13 billion a year. this markup meeting is an hour. >> the meeting will come to order. the committee will come to order to consider bills to implement three trade agreements, the united states, colombia promotion agreement, the united states panama trade promotion agreement and the united states korea trade agreement. and appoint three nominees

michael punke ambassador of the world trade organization, islam siddiqui to be chief agriculture negotiator at the office of the u.s. trade representative and paul piquado to be assistant secretary of commerce and david johansson to be a member of the united states international trade commission. john quincy adams once said, patience and perseverance have a magical effect. before which difficulties disappear and obstacles vanish. our free trade agreements with colombia, panama and south korea are near the end of a long journey. we've faced difficulties and obstacles along the way. but thanks to the patience and perseverance along the way, we've overcome them. we're now poised to give these agreements our final approval it will create tens of thousands of

american jobs. it will give our ranchers, farmers, workers and businesses a competitive edge and three lucrative fast-growing markets. they'll increase u.s. exports by $13 billion. they'll boost our gdp by more than $15 billion. they are what our economy needs right now. the journey of these agreement began during the bush administration. they negotiated robust commitments to open markets for american manufactured goods, farm products and services. in 2007, congress continued the journey when it negotiated the may 10th bipartisan trade deal. it amended the trade agreements to include the strongest labor environmental provisions of anticipate trade agreement in the world. but after the agreements were signed obstacles remained. american ramblers, business

owners could not compete in a level playing field. american beef faced entrenched barriers. labor conditions in colombia had approved but problems persisted. and serious concerns remained about tax evasion and monday laundering in panama. president obama and his administration worked with congress to tackle these problems. we improved access of u.s. beef by creating a fund to promote beef sales in korea and committing to remove unscientific barriers. we eliminated more tariff barriers to protect workers and workers rights and we signed an agreement with panama to improve tax transparency. with these concerns addressed only one hurdle remained, renewing trade adjustment assistance. when workers lose their jobs because of foreign competition, trade adjustment assistance gives them the job training, income support and health

benefits they need to find employment. since 2009 alone, nearly 450,000 american workers have been eligible for taa and despite the great recession more than half of these workers have found new jobs. i'm going to have to ask for those in the audience to refrain, please. don't disrupt. because if the disruption continues we're going to have to take other action. but i just ask you please not disrupt during the proceedings. trade adjustment assistance has been a pillar of american trade policy for five decades. it has broad support but the program expired in february. congress has never voted to approve one trade agreement much less three without the workers in place. without it, congress could not pass trade agreements but trade

agreements paid off. i had a agreement with my good friend david camp chairman of the ways and means committee. it included all the core provisions of the trade adjustments. two weeks ago the center approved our agreement with 69 votes. that vote removed the last obstacle and allowed the president to submit the trade agreements to congress. no one has worked harder to get these trade agreements approved than american farmers. take gordon stoner a wheat farmer from outlook montana in may god left his wheat farm in the middle of spring planting to testify before this committee about the colombia free trade agreement. he told us thief lost deals with other countries. gordon like all american farmers is not like patient and perseverance. he said if we approved the colombia fda the farmers will

recapture this vital market. the national trade agreement agrees. it will increase the u.s. grain sales to colombia by up to 80%. finally we cannot forget the patience and perseverance of our fta partners. earlier this year i visited colombia, met with president santos, members of his cabinet, labor leaders and business men and women. i saw a country healing from the wounds of war, expanding its economy. i saw a country turning land to poor farmers and compensating victims of violence and i saw a country stemming the flow of illegal narcotics and the violence that accomplished it. in 10 years colombia has moved from the brink of being a failed state to the nation country in the leader. >> killing labor leaders. >> the meeting will come to orde order.

comments from the audience are inappropriate. there's a time and place for everything. there's a time and place for demonstrations. there's a -- >> you don't bipartisan. >> they killed labor leaders. >> and any further disruption will cause the committee to recess until the committee comes to order. despite the progress we've made in colombia, they'll look for approval of the colombia fta was very much in doubt at the time of my visit in february. colombians were deeply and rightly concerned but i gave them my word that the three fta's including the colombia fta would move forward together or not at all. including passage of trade adjustment assistance. to date, their patience and perseverance have paid off. they are considering the nominations of four trade

officials today each of the nominees has shown uncommon patience and perseverance at this point. michael punke a distinguished montanan has been nominated to be deputy trade representative and ambassador of the world trade organization. islam siddiqui will be the chief representative and paul piquado has been nominated to be assistant secretary of commerce for import administration. and david johansson nominated to be a member of the national trade commission. each of these nominees has the energy, the skill and the creativity and the commitment to fill important roles that they've been asked to perform. i strongly support each nominee and hope the senate will act quickly to confirm them. so today as we take a mainly step forward to advance america's trade agenda, let us remember the wisdom of john quincy adams. let us show once again the difficulties that disappeared and the obstacles vanished in the face of patience and

perseverance. let us approve the free trade agreements with colombia, panama and south korea and export jobs at home and let us favorably report these foreign nominees to help carry out our trade agenda. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. i agree with the four nominees and approximately nine years ago congress provides president bush with trade promotion authority. president bush aggressively used that authority to negotiate 11 trade agreements with 16 countries. including the three agreements we're considering here today. the first two agreements chile and singapore have been in effect for six years. the export of u.s. goods to those two countries frufrom $410 million to $15.3 billion. now, prior to 2007, nine more ftas were negotiated providing unprecedented access to growing u.s. exports. yet since december 2007 not a

single new trade agreement has been negotiated or approved. and the others languished and frankly as a democratic government new preconditions for their consideration. for almost four years we have stood still and done nothing and while other countries raced ahead and seized america's market share around the world in a time of economic uncertainty and weak job growth this failure to act by the administration remains shocking. from 2005 to 2010, the u.s. trade surplus with its recent free trade partners surged from $1.7 billion to $24.5 billion excluding oil. in contrast, our trade deficit with the rest of the world remains stubbornly high over those years. but tespite the many obstacles in the way we and our trading partners persevered and now very soon we will finally complete the work that was begun so long

ago. the gains that will result from workers, consumers are long overdue. there are far too many people to thank for getting us here today. let me just note my appreciation for the efforts of chairman baucus and his staff in working with us to expedite consideration of these ftas in the finance committee and on the senate floor. it's no surprise that the american people do not hold congress in the highest regard. yet, i think it is worth recalling while the president waited almost three years before he submitted these ftas only eight days ago, congress will act in a manner of days to quickly consider them and hopefully get them across the finish line. i would also alike to thank utah ustr negotiators who worked tirelessly and have had tra the wor -- to finally take advantage of the benefits of these agreements that our negotiators secured over four years ago.

these countries maintain high tariff barriers to our exports, while most of their exports enter our market with little or no duty. approval of these three trade agreement will finally provide fair access for u.s. exporters. they will also alleviate the unfair advantage that many of our trade partners such as canada and the european union have gained in these growing markets while we stood still and failed to act. finally, approval -- >> the trade agreements created any jobs. >> i'd alike to advise the public that disruptions in the form of signs or outbursts will not be tolerated. and if they continue i'm going to have to ask the committee to stand in recess until the recess -- until the order can be restored here in this hearing. i think it's preferable that those who have different points of view stay, but i think it's preferable that those who stay do not indulge in outbursts during this proceeding.

but if those who stay do indulge in outbursts, i have no choice but to call the committee to order and have the committee stand in recess until the police restore order. senator hatch? >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. finally, approval of these agreement will cement our alliance with three key partners, each of whom deserves our continued free support. let's start with colombia -- >> the meeting will come to order. the committee will stand in recess so that the police can restore order. >> trade agreements kill u.s. jobs. colombia is killing -- colombia is killing trade jobs all the time. shame, shame, shame. [applause] >> colombia is killing trade union leaders. we want jobs here.

trade kills jobs. >> should i finish? [laughter] >> i'm just about done. >> senator hatch? >> let's start a colombia it was a poster child for the failed narco state thanks largely to the brave leadership of key colombian government officials, the story is very different today. colombia's economy is growing. and employment is up. and violence is markedly decreased. institutional reforms are creating a stronger and more vibrant democracy. land reform and reparations for restricts of violence continue to advance in an unprecedented effort to heal the wounds of the past. along the way the united states provided important support for colombia. approval of our fta with colombia will reaffirm our support for colombia and its long battle for democracy and long-standing commitment to the rule of law as well as provide important new market access -- >> that's not what -- >> panama is a thriving democracy. with one of the fastest growing economies in latin america,

panama is a land of new opportunities for workers and entrepreneurs from around the world. panama's commitment to open markets in adoption of fiscal transparency squires its place as one of the financial hubs of the world. with the approval of our free trade agreement with panama the united states has the opportunity to provide significant new access for u.s. businesses and workers to this growing economy. south korea is one of our strongest allies in north asia and is currently our largest export market in the world. this trade agreement will serve as a models in the region and reaffirm engagement in the asian pacific region. each of these agreements provides important benefits to the united states. but at the end of the day, much more is at stake. over the past five years, the position of the united states and the global leader and trade liberalization has weakened. our inaction on these highly beneficial trade agreements for so many years has led many to doubt whether the united states remains serious about addressing

the world and its own economic challenges and whether we can be counted upon to deliver on our promises. with the approval of these three free trade agreements we can begin taking the first steps toward rebuilding our image as a global leader on trade while at the same time provided much-needed economic opportunities to u.s. workers and job creators here at home. and mostly a place where we will be considering our trade nominations today, i admire each of these individuals to serve and hope that they will be quickly confirmed by the u.s. senate. so mr. chairman, i thank you for your leadership on these matters. i appreciate it very much. and i'm prepared to go ahead. >> thank you very much, senator. now, the chair will recommend other senators who wish to speak. i ask to hold remarks to about 4 minutes in order of arrival. i have senator white and then i'll go back and forth. democrats, republicans. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman and colleagues, i'll be brief.

as chairman of our trade subcommittee here at the finance committee, it's become evident that there is ongoing significant demand for american goods and services around the world. and we have a chance to feed that demand and feed it throw american exports. and what that means is for our constituents, we can grow things here. we can make things here. we can add value to them here and then we can ship them all over the world. and that translates into family wage jobs for our constituents. and i want to just make one point that i think is indisputable with respect to this trade debate because certainly there are a lot of differences of opinion with respect to trade. but there is one fact that is indisputable, indisputable and that is that our markets are

overwhelmingly open to countries around the world and, again, and again and we find that our trading partners have significant barriers that applies to us. it applies to agriculture. it applies to wood products. it applies to steel. and in the debate over the next few days, i'm going to be going through some of the differentials in the barriers but just wanted to cite one. oregon exports of beef face a 40% tariff upon arrival co-rhea beef but coran beef appearance tariff of 4% when it arrives in the united states. so if you can go forward with a trade policy that touches on this that is leveling the playing field our exports and our workers can get more out of this than those around the world. so i look forward to working

with our colleagues on a bipartisan basis and i yield the rest of my time. >> the committee will come to order. the committee will stand in recess until order can be restore restored. >> senator wyden, you should be ashamed of yourself. i'm ashamed of you -- >> the committee will be in order. >> actually, i overruled myself because i know senator stabenow came very early so next on the list here is senator stabenow. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. first let me say with the three trade agreements that we have, i will be supporting co-rhea but opposing colombia and panama and i'd just like to briefly say why. on co-rhea when the agreement with you first signed in 2007 i strongly opposed it because it didn't do enough in terms of

american manufacturing, particularly automobiles with other manufacturers as well. and that machinery automobiles will be allowed open access into south korea. i appreciate the fact that you listened to the concerns of workers and the companies regarding that. with my chair of the agriculture committee hat on i would just simply say south korea is our fifth biggest market for agricultural exports as you know. nearly two-thirds of our exportless enter korea duty-free once the agreement is signed in force. i'm supportive but i do want to represent my korea. the administration tried to address this through their labor action plan but, unfortunately, it was not included in the agreement and i believe that without it, we have no way of ensuring that colombia will follow through on its commitments.

it's still a very extremely dangerous place to work. last year, 51 labor leaders were assassinated so far this year 23 leaders have been assassinated and i believe it's not just a human rights issue which, of course, is very important. but it's an issue that affects american workers because they are undercut when the wages of colombian workers are kept artificially low due to the denial of basic worker rights. [applause] >> finally, in panama, panama has a history of allowing businesses in subsidiaries to evade u.s. taxes. panama has not yet shown in my judgment that they will no longer be a tax haven. panama agreement would require the united states to waive by american requirements for procurement bids in foreign films including chinese firms incorporated in this major tax haven and they also have a history of denying basic worker rights and mr. chairman, i would

finally just say that as we enter into what will be three new agreements and we have more than 300 trade agreements right now, we still have the smallest trade enforcement office of any industrialized country including mickey cantor who have spoke before the committee. someone needs to speak in front of trade enforcement. last week as part of the fight against currency manipulation with china senator lindsey graham and i created a amendment that would create a chief enforcement official. i believe that we need that. the majority of our utr is focused on creating agreements but not enforcing them and so i think it's very important for our businesses and our workers we have a level playing field. and the bottom line for me we want to export our products and not our jobs. thanks very much.

>> thank you, senator. next, senator menendez. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to first thank you for your tireless commitment to ensuring that the extension of trade adjustment assistance as we are talking about these trade agreements, that that, in fact, is moving forward for americans whose jobs are displaced as a result of trade. and while there -- the argument has been made that these ftas may create as many as 70,000 american jobs, the benefits of trade are not uniform. not everyone will benefit from these agreements and i find it morally wrong to look at an american and say simply because of our trade agreements you happen to be the victim of economic displacement and you're on your own. and that's what would happen if we did not have trade adjustment assistance moving forward as well so i appreciate the

chairman's efforts in making that a reality. the taa reflects a reflection of that trade policy and we need to take care of our own hard-working americans that may lose their jobs due to trade. i am prepared to support the korea and panama agreement but oppose the colombian agreement because of ongoing labor violence in the country because the agreement doesn't underscore the importance of that issue. i have been one of the strongest supporters of colombia as a member in the house international relations committee. on the western hemisphere subcommittee. i have been one of the strongest supports of colombia as a member of the foreign committee in the western hemisphere committee. it has made great progress rooting out the drug catells and has emerged as a stronger democratic nation. it's now lending its expertise to other countries who are threatened by the scourge of the

narcotics trade. it has strengthened its democracy in so many ways and it's to be applauded for all of that. however, i read and i ask unanimous consent that today's ap article be included in the record. a human rights watch study found, quote, virtually no progress in getting convictions for killings that have occurred in the past four and a half years. it counted just six convictions obtained by a special prosecutions unit from 195 slayings with nearly 9 in 10 of the union's cases from that period in preliminary stages with no suspect formally identified. colombia is the world's most lethal country for labor organizings and the killings haven't stopped. at least 38 trade unionists have been slain since the president took office in 2010 according to colombia's national labor school. convictions have been obtained

for less than 10% of the 2,886 trade unionists killed since 1986. less than 10%. and the rights group have found severe shortcomings in the special units that are supposed to be pursuing this. so i'd ask unanimous consent so i don't read the entire article into the record. >> without objection. >> and during the markup hearing, i had offered as part of an effort to be in a position where i could have supported the colombia plan, the colombia labor action plan is a positive step towards addressing labor violence in colombia and it was my hope that the text of the plan and reporting requirements would have been included in the implementing legislation and i sought to do that in the markup. language that would require the president to report to the congress annually on the implementation and enforcement of the colombia labor action

plan by the government of colombia. this inclusion would have been consistent with reporting requirements in other ftas. my reporting requirement mirrored exactly in the kafta and a half -- nafta requirements. the requirement reporting plans is included in the implementing legislation to ensure that colombia's labor leaders are not forgotten once this agreement is implemented and that is crucial. because as we have seen, if you're a labor leader in colombia, you're likely to die. ..

a. >> they want to sell whatever, cars in korea, they sell here. we don't have many barriers but when we try to sell our goods and services there, they have barriers. why is that? what i've learned in drilling down in this, go back to the end of world war ii, we emerged from world war ii the strongest economy on earth. we were the 800-pound gorilla in the room when it came to international trade. we made better products, we dominate markets, whether it was cars or anything you can think of. other countries in an effort to build their markets began to

erect barriers to keep our goods and services out. as time goes by, they've gotten to be a lot better, stronger competitors. and, frankly, the time has come to level the playing field. i think what the president has tried to do is to say, you know, game over. we are tired of the fact that after all these years other countries are still trying to keep our products out whether they haven't the cars, chemicals, poultry, whether they happen to be financial services. we are tired of keeping our stuff out. we will allow you to sell your products here, we don't try to stop it. it's time for you to cut it out. i think that's the bottom line of what's going on here. someone asked me today in a conference call i had with some labor friends and he said how do we know this is going to work. at the end of the day what we need to do is stay on it and to make sure it's being

implemented. the president says on colombia if the implementation plan is not fully implemented, that we're not going to implement the free trade agreement. he's been about as direct as he can be. i want to say to everyone who is raising concern about whether it's the death of a labour leader, teacher or a judge in colombia, one death of any those people is too many. the idea some people said we should feel better because the numbers are down from 200 plus down to as low as 20 or 25. one death is too many. it's important we remain vigilant and make sure the colombian government knows we will remain vigilant and we expect it to comply with the implementation plan. we're not going to go away and they've got to know that. thanks very much. >> thanks, senator. mr. roberts. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i want to thank you as well as other members who expressed their support on behalf of your perseverance, and for your efforts on behalf of these

agreements. i think collectively at least the information i have that the free trade agreement add up to about 13 billion in additional exports, that's about 250,000 jobs, and i would also say that under the trade agreements that exports from colombia and panama have already come in duty free for years now under a variety of preference programs. with these agreements do is level the playing field and address some concerns that my college have, extend the same benefits to u.s. producers and exporters who still face the terrace and other markets. i think the answer to that is obvious. the estimate is these agreement to increase direct exports by $130 million for kansas ranchers and farmers, and create an

additional 1150 jobs. delay is not without consequence and there's been a lot of delay on these three agreements. my colleagues on the other side have addressed some of the problems. but it's not without consequences. right now some 100 plus trade agreements are being negotiated without the united states. that's not including the trade agreements that entered into force already. i think just for the amount of time that we have, i'm going to take the time to thank senator wyden for his in ricardo reis is the situation will provide with trade, thank him for his diligent efforts, as subcommittee chairman, and want to associate myself with your remarks. >> thank you. senator crapo is next. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. congress is hopefully on the

cusp of passing historic trade legislation, and while auspicious this is not a moment in my opinion that reflects well on congress, the administration or our country. for almost four years our trade competitors have enacted agreements they erode our export markets while we frankly have yielded the field. the rest of the world has been busy signing new agreements expanding markets and trading trading alliances. if ever there were a self-inflicted wound, this is it. four years a bipartisan majority in congress have been ready to help our exporters by new market opportunities and reduce consumer prices on the many goods that we import. that's what it's truly a shame that we have had to face this kind of delay in the united states. i have with concern saying that just days ago president has put yet another apparent roadblock in the way of implementing the colombian free trade agreement saying he will forgo

implementation until colombia fulfills its commitments under the labor action plan. this despite repeated confirmation from u.s. trade representative curt that colombia has met its obligations. filing and are at the next-to-last step, but support for these agreements has never really been in doubt. mr. chairman, i have an extended statement here going over the benefits of each of these agreements, which i would forgo and request the full statement be made a part of the record. >> without objection. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would just say that consideration of trade agreements by the finance committee has a really long and distinguished history with bipartisan cooperation and progress on behalf of the american people. i appreciate the chairman's efforts to get us to the point because i know that you have been supportive of doing so. it's time now that the administration and the members of congress remember that the tradition, this committee has set up benefits our nation greatly as we move forward, and

keep our nation competitive in world markets. i appreciate the fact mr. chairman, that you've moved as quickly as you can once the opportunity has presented itself. thank you. >> thank you very much, senator. senator cardin. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. i also appreciate your leadership in the manner in which these free trade agreements have been handled. trade is critically important to our country, critically important to my state of maryland. baltimore is very important economic engine of my state, and just we want to see our ports busy with enforcement also exports. so having a balanced trade agreement to us is very, very important. i will not support the colombia free trade agreement and i want to give my reasons why. some of the proudest moments in america's history is when we stood up for human rights and were prepared to use trade as a way of advancing international human rights. the law was an important

statement by this country but also changed the habits within the former soviet union. united states led internationally on use of trade to change the apartheid government of south africa. so i think trade is an important tool that we have, and in colombia let me just quote if i might from the 2010 state department human rights report. this is what they said, 2010. unlawful and expedition killings in subordinate military collaboration with newly illegal armed groups, forced disappearance, torture, mistreatment of detainees, inefficient judicial subject and intimidation, illegal surveillance of civilian groups, political and government agencies occasional harassment, intimidation of journalists, harassment of human rights groups including unfounded prosecution, violence is women including rape, discrimination against women, indigenous persons, afro columbus, illegal

child labor, and the list goes on. i do want to point out, mr. chairman, that the report also notes the administration has made a strong demonstration advances in improving human rights department. we all know that. my concern is that we did not incorporate the type of changes into this agreement that we should. that's what i offered an amendment to this free trade agreement during the committee markup markup this past july that would've codified the commitments of the colombia labor action plan within the body of the agreement to ensure that it is acted upon in part of the agreement in perpetuity. i agree with a common sentiment is has made. i was disappointed we did not include that in a disappointed that the administration did not include the contending way to enforce the type of labor commitments that supposedly are part of this agreement. for all those reasons and others i will not support the colombian free trade agreement. >> thank you, senator. sender care your next. >> mr. chairman, thank you.

like it but i'm very pleased that you have worked hard to get us to the point of bring these three agreements forward, and let me just say about all of them. as we hear important voices from america talking about jobs across the country, i really think it's important for people to look at the four corners of these agreements and take a hard look and read them, because the fact is these agreements are fairly one-sided in our favor. they actually open up markets that are closed to us, and equal the playing field that has been unequal against us for a long period of time. i just urge people rather than being automatic, look at it. i understand colombia, i will speak to that in a minute, but these agreements actually create jobs for americans. and the fact is that the tariff cuts alone in the u.s.-south korea trade agreement will increase exports of american

goods by 10 billion-$11 billion. now, those $11 billion represent jobs for america, and we will not have those jobs if we do not have this agreement. the panama agreement also guarantees access to a $20.6 billion services market, and a strategic location as a major shipping route. and to address our concerns with banking laws, which we thought were not there for us, panama signed tax information exchange agreement and amended its domestic law to deal with the problem anonymous accounts. those are all benefits for us. they help us with accountability in the global marketplace. but obviously the most, the most controversial agreed is the colombia agreement. and i really am very sympathetic and i mindful as chairman of foreign relations committee that the comments of two very viable members of our committee, senator cardin, who works in

heads up our helsinki commission and works constantly on this, and senator menendez, but there can be differences of opinion even as we all acknowledge that there are continued abuses. there are continued problems. i understand it. nobody is blind to that. but a lot of us have pushed for a long time on colombia's efforts to institute a strong ministry of labor. that's been one of our goals, and the ministry was not in the specific labor action plan, colombia's congress recently passed a measure requiring the executive to create one by the end of next month. colombia has also passed laws that we pushed them to pass to stem the abuse of contract labor and enforcement. has it accomplished everything we want it to accomplish? know, but it has passed and it

is in place and it is moving. most people in bogotá and colombia watches elsewhere use phrases like cautious optimism, describe the changes of the last year in colombia. they say it's fragile but hopeful. you can look at this many ways. we can say this with that. if we do that we lose any leverage whatsoever that we may or may not think we have the. gone. no reason after all these years of debate about this, for anybody to believe anything these united states says is important because they do the things and they do the things and they keep moving at great risk. this is a country where 12 or 13 members of the supreme court were assassinated one day when a gunman just marched in and shot everybody. a country where presidential candidates running for office to change their country were assassinated while trying to do it. a country in which counsel -- countless candidates have been assassinated and people are taken great risk.

president santos been whole took office last office. -- august. is championed reforms, in order to address this question of violence. he reversed the anti-activist rhetoric in bogotá during his administration, yes, they have only been selective, senator cardin, i agree with you, but they have finally taken on some high profile human rights abuses. do they need to do more? yes, they do. is at an acceptable level? know it's not that i believe our best hope in order to get them to continue to believe in us and have a relationship with us that matters into be able to leverage the things that are of interest is to help their society to be able to stabilize and grow. if they don't have some efforts whether a content proves to do that, i don't think we can do that. general phillips testified before this committee and said colombia's comeback from the brink of becoming a failed state

in the 1980s and '90s. having been involved throughout that period as i was, both on the foreign relations committee and the banking committee in the 1980s and '90s, in our efforts to address an incredibly toxic brew of flow of drugs, illicit money, drugs, narcotics, contraband throughout the region, a time when we found major banking abuses which included osama bin laden, and manuel noriega, all of this we've seen an incredible transition taking place. and i'm voting for the future. i'm voting for the idea that colombia is, in fact, qualified as fragile and cautious because these advances could easily unravel and i think it's critical with the passage of this agreement that we will be taking steps that actually increase our leverage, increase the odds of better outcomes and hopefully will allow us to continue to address the abuses

that we know have continued. and that's a future that i think is worth investing in. >> thank you, senator. [inaudible] >> senator cantwell, your next. >> turn one. i've said many a statement for the record. >> okay, senator cantwell. >> mr. chairman, i congratulate you on your hard work on these three agreements. i support them. let me raise an issue that i raised when we had the committee mock markup in july. that is the issue of our lack of resources in the u.s. trade representative's office to actually enforce these agreements. i think it's clear that we do not adequately fund that office. i think it's clear that the general counsel's office within the u.s. trade representative's office has too few people to

enforce the various agreements we've already entered into, and now with the entering into these additional agreements we are going to be substantially understaffed and under resourced your i hope that at the time had the mark -- mock markup i try to suggest we should include something better to recommend to the administration that they request and implementing legislation additional funds. that was considered out of order. somewhere or other i believe it's imperative that we make the point to this administration and to the appropriations committees in the house and senate that they need to give more resources to the general counsel's office if are going to see proper monitoring and enforcement of these trade agreements.

because, frankly, i think they are understaffed and overworked right now, and i think, i know senator crapo made the point. he said he thought the failure to bring these trade agreements board was a self-inflicted wound. i think the failure to adequately staff and resource the u.s. trade representative's office is a self-inflicted wound which we continue to perpetuate your in this congress. i think it's very shortsighted. so i will stop with that, and let you get on with the rest of the statements. >> thank you very much senator. senator thune. >> thank you, mr. chairman. there's the old saying that better late than never, and i think it applies in this case. it's been over for years now since these agreements were signed, and i'm pleased we're finally where we are. i just have to look at, on august 15, canada signed an agreement or entered into an agreement i should say with

colombia. since that time canadian wheat exports to colombia be increased by 18.3%. i think that's what this means for american agriculture, and i think it's pretty clear that you can't stand still on trade. we have either, we've got to either be moving toward or the rest of the world will move forward without us and that's going to be the judgment of american producers and consumers. i'm glad we're finally moving these agreements for. i know i toy with most of my colleagues when i say i look forward to the passage of these bills, and what it can mean for american exporters, for jobs for people in this country. and i think those are all things that many of us want to see happen, so i'm anxious to get these things moving and look forward to voting to pass them. thank you. >> thank you, senator. any senators present to make an opening statement. i would like to welcome special guests we have with us today.

colombia's ambassador gabriele sola, south korea's ambassador hung doctors who. and panama ambassador mario. thank you all very much for being here. we are honored to have you present with us today. now i will turn to the trade agreements themselves. on july 7, we had a mock markup for each agreement, october through the president submit the final implementing bill to the congress, final bills are substantially similar to the draft bills your the committee may not amend bills. i will start with s. 1641, the bill to implement the colombia agreement. we have administration official here to answer any questions. thank you for your presence but also mr. mike smart from my

staff. at this point would like to mr. smart watch for any modification that will not walk through the whole bill. just walked to any modifications at this point. mr. smart, why don't you be extremely short? we have 13 senators present, and allow senators to ask any question that before we we have the final vote. >> unless senators want to walk through. i discourage that. [laughter] >> thank you. that was a great walk through. [laughter] >> are there any questions? senator menendez? >> i have one brief question which i really want to establish more because i'm sure will have trade agreements for the future, so to mr. reif, during the

mockup i and others offered anonymity requires the president to annually report on the implementation and enforcement of the colombia later action plan. i understand that this type of reporting requirements consistent with reporting requirements both in cafta and nafta, is that true? >> thank you, senator menendez. there are general reporting requirement as you know you as they are reports annually on all of our trade agreement programs in march of every year and we will do so, we do so with respective nafta, cafta. will do so with respect to these three agreements as well. spent my question was whether not specific reporting requirements in cafta and nafta that do with labor rights as part of the reporting obligation to? >> there was a specific reporting requirement in cafta that pertained to a very special part of that, that was a white paper that was created by the

ilo. the reporting requirement contained to that. >> what is the administration position on providing an annual report on the colombia labor action plan? >> the labor action plans contain the ongoing reporting between the government ongoing, as you know most of the requirements will need to be fulfilled before january 1, 2012 and, therefore, the president has to determine whether the agreement is to come to the fact, when it is to come into effect so we were taking that into account. as was pointed out earlier he made that explicit three times in his letter of transmittal to congress. the president intends to take that into account as he brings the agreement into effect. beyond that there's periodic, there are periodic meetings between the u.s. and the colombian government as the action plan unfolds. and also they would be opportunity to be in dialogue with the congress in that

context of the congress spent there would be an opportunity there is no explicit obligation? >> there's no strict reporting requirement on the action plan. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator cardin? >> very quickly i just want to clarify that last point. after the president has made a certification 2012, putting an awful lot of responsibility with the president to move forward on it, virtually he has to, there's no enforcement within the agreement for failure to comply what was in the labor agreement? >> the agreement itself does not contain a formal enforcement mechanism. however, the number of aspects in the agreement that relate to the core labor standards speed i understand the core labor, that i understand. i was referring only to the sidebar labor agreement itself. >> that's correct. >> okay. if there's no further debatecome

entertain a motion to support s. 1641. those in favor say aye ko. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is recorded. roll call has been requested. clerk call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call] [roll call] >> the clerk will announce the results of the votes.

>> mr. chairman, the tallied member present is 18 ayes, three nays. the final tally including proxies is 18 ayes, six nays. the ayes have it. next order of business is panama bill. which are briefly described differences, actually unless someone has question. i don't see senator asking to ask about the differences. i see no questions. senators, the chair will entertain a motion.

>> so move. >> senator hatch has made the motion. all those in favor say aye ko. all of those opposed say no. the ayes have it. report. next order of business is our final free trade agreement. considered to implement south korea agreement which is marked, those of us again, and let's senators have questions, i suggest vote. the chair will entertain a motion. >> so move. >> all in favor say i go. those opposed? the ayes have it. the bill is ordered to report. we will next move to trade nominees and abate any of the four nominees if not i entertained the commission, depending nominees on block. >> so moved spent all those in favor say i go. opposed say no. the ayes have it. one final moment.

address our audience, those who have spoken up, clearly all of us want to create jobs. anybody who doesn't know that living in this town can he or she has lived under a rock. we all want to create jobs. it's the most important effort i think, all of us undertake, especially with such high unemployment in our country today. we know these trade agreements, while they create jobs, also, continue to meet with elected officials. the main point i want to make is this. we have a great country. we have a bill of rights. we have a first amendment. we have free speech. it is probably the cornerstone of liberty in this country. and i deeply respect first amendment, all this, our country wish to speak out, freedom of

assembly, freedom of press. as we move forward, urge all of us, member, and on about and so that any future we still had even better agreements, even better legislation. so i thank all those who attended today, and the meeting is adjourned. >> it a fact based on a topic of your choosing. every good story has a good beginning, a solid middle and a strong ending.

>> you don't need the best video equipment to have a winning project. cell phones do a great job of capturing video. if you don't have access to better video equipment, don't let that stop you. if you need more help go to studentcam.org. >> this process can be confusing at first but c-span will help you stay organized. i find it useful to read the rules carefully and then make a checklist of what you need to do. don't worry, the process becomes clear once you get started spent another great thing is you can work alone on the project or you can work on teams. if you're a good writer but not very handy with a camera, get a friend to help out. not only we both learn something but you increase your chances of winning. >> you don't need to be an expert at video production or interviewing, you can use your parents, other students, teachers, and c-span as resources for you along the way. this process is both fun and

extremely rewarding. with a little bit of effort, anyone can do this. >> homeland security secretary janet napolitano joined predecessors michael chertoff and tom ridge to discuss the department and its future. former coast guard commandant thad allen moderated the event hosted by george washington university. it's an hour and a half. [applause] >> good afternoon.

it's a delight to welcome you to this afternoons important discussion of the future of homeland security. it's also a particular honor to welcome secretary janet napolitano, former secretaries of michael chertoff and tom ridge back to our campus. here at george washington with a unique opportunity to engage the world from this nation's capital and to enable our students to witness the power of knowledge in action. one of the ways we do so is by convening discussions the urgent issues of our time and our ability to do that depends on in many ways on our partnerships with the institutions and agencies that surround us. i'm very glad to have as one of those partners the united states department of homeland security which has long supported a range of policy, research and educational efforts across our university. george washington's homeland security policy institute leaves much of our work in this critical area. we offer training programs from first responders and greater

programs in fields of cybersecurity, emergency management, and security policy. the universe shows an array of security related initiatives spearheaded by entities as diverse as the elliott school of international affairs and the school of engineering and applied science. today will have the opportunity to learn firsthand from an exceptionally distinguished panel. i look forward to hearing their insight into the homeland security environment, looking forward. i'm also delighted to note that our alumnus admiral thad allen retired, didn't of united states coast guard, former national incident commander for the deepwater horizon oil spill, and now a professor in our school of public policy administration will moderate this afternoon's discussion. before hearing from secretaries napolitano, chertoff and rich, and admiral allen, we will first hear from our hosts, frank, director of the homeland security policy institute and mark perl, president and ceo of

the homeland security and defense business council. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming frank is a little. [applause] >> thank you. and let me echo you're welcome to everyone today. it is a distinct distinct privilege to be able to cohost today's session. as i was in the outback, i literally a decade of my life collide simultaneously. and, you don't get are public servants than the three that are joining us today. and i've had the privilege to work with all of them. we've had the privilege to host all of them in the past, but never simultaneously. so i know i certainly am excited to hear what they all have to say. and thank you all for joining us today. let me also thank our cohost, mark perl. he's done yeoman's work in trying to translate announce into verbs in terms of

public-private partnerships, and to lead to work with him. and, of course, our friend admiral alan. so thank you all, and look forward to this. thank you. [applause] >> i want to thank everyone for joining us today. and particularly the homeland security policy institute here at gw, president knapp and everyone in the gw family for helping us put together an important and what we think is going to be an exciting program. this is the second in the homeland security councils national conversation series that is trying to look forward to how we can continue together to build the structures, processes, systems needed to have the sparse most successful homeland security possible. while the phrase this is the most critical time in our nation's history is overly used, this too is a pivotal time in our nation's history. we're at the crossroads of a perfect not necessarily welcomed

confluence of a global economic social and political dynamism that will not only have an impact on the infrastructure of our nation but will test on how we proactively rather than reactively tackle the issues that bring us together today. we need to look closely at what the governments role and responsibility can be in preventing preparing for, responding to and being resilient in the face of a major catastrophic event, whether it by terrorism or by nature. while what we do and what has been created and nurtured since 9/11, including katrina, h1n1, abdulmutallab the and fax trial against today. times square, fort hood, printer cartridges, tsunamis, oil spill's and the decimation of al qaeda in just the past 10 years is still an evolving work in progress. industry, particularly does provide home and security technology, services and product

solutions is ready, willing and able to work even more collaboratively with government going forward. our goal is to enter into a fruitful substitute an ongoing dialogue focusing on working together to achieve mission success. the council's march national conversation of the american red cross which features the fema administrator and head of the american red cross focused on preparedness and resilience. today on this gw campus in front of an audience of experts i might add, in their own right, we have asked for individuals have long since graduated from dhs 101, to help us tackle the issues surrounding the evolving homeland security, homeland landscape under a new normal of politics and policy. what we'll and what should be the framework going forward. the council calls it a 2020 homeland security vision, combining the need for clarity and exploring what the world

must look like in homeland security in the year 2020. one housekeeping announcement, we have provided you with cards you can write and the question when we open up the floor to questions. i urge you to pass them to the outside if you think of a question during our conversation. we will pick them up and get them to our moderator. speaking of our moderator, there are a few individuals as president nap mentioned in our nation who understand as much as admiral featherweight allen the true meaning of how to successfully operationalize homeland security and what better person to moderate his distinguished assemblage of public service and expertise. the capstone of his career in being the commandant of the coast guard that started in june when he starred in the coast guard in june of 1971 was as everyone well knows being the principal federal officer in the gulf in 2005 and then being called down to the region again in 2010 to become the national incident commander of the

deepwater horizon spill. times article referred to his appointment to lead the oil spill response said it simply, and to the point, al and candor and, candor and competence brought an aura of calm to the crisis. but long before his face was splashed across her tv set on a daily basis twice over the past six years, it already given so much to our nation. he led the modernization, the first modernization of the coast guard since world war ii. while he has multiple honorary degrees, he also got his bachelor's in science in action in from the coast guard academy, using p.a. from this very school, the george washington university and his masters of science. and so in order to bring some order and calm into office with a mission today to lay out the next decade rather than just look back, i'm excited to turn the proceedings over to an individual has worked closely with and under all three of our dhs secretaries, admiral thad allen.

[applause] >> thank you, mark, for the very interesting introduction. the panel here really need no introduction. as i told them backstage i was not going to read lengthy bios but it would like to make a couple comments because i have a great fortune and the great honor to work person with these three great leaders. and i think a couple of comments probably are appropriate before we start our discussion here today. i will start with secretary ridge, gave up the autonomy of being a chief executive in the state of pennsylvania, to come forward when the president asked him to be the first homeland security adviser. and i remember when the president signed the legislation on the 25th of november, 2002, to establish the department. that was done with midterm elections, 60 day mandate, which had to be placed into effect on the 24th of january with a new agencies coming over on the first of march.

i remember seeing secretary ridge for the first time in a cubicle, and we walked over, gave him a travel card, and he was the department. thank you for being here today. >> army of one. [laughter] >> secretary chertoff left the safe confines being a federal judge and wrist all by coming back to washington, and we are glad he did that. prior to my intimate relationship with him during hurricane katrina, he launched a major review of the department based on the feedback he got from secretary ridge and the expense of earth couple years. we looked at the border, transportation security under secretary to see if that was the right format to look at border security. he launched the second stage review which was an attempt to take a look at what i would call the department 2.0. and, indeed, with the significant challenges associated with the legislation,

legislative mandates following hurricane katrina a special with the revised rule of theme and national preparedness. somebody i dealt with on a daily basis and with the present during hurricane katrina so i've most respect for secretary chertoff, thank you. [applause] >> in december 2008 after the election and before the inauguration, i was home visiting my parents into tucson, arizona, i thought it would behoove me to go to phoenix and meet my governor, at that time janet napolitano. we had the opportunity to get to know each other in a very good conversation without a lot of distractions around, paved the way for a relationship that extended past the inauguration and into her first year as secretary of homeland security. we have experienced some of the same types of external pressures related to events, you don't always predict that secretary chertoff and i have. i always appreciate her

forthrightness. i was grateful she was my governor and i was proud of her. thank you. [applause] >> the general goal of tonight's discussion, and we really want it to be a discussion, encourage the interchange between our secretaries that are here, is to start off with a couple of comments about whether department is right now. there's been a lot of retrospective of the department since it was, when the agency's came over in march 2003. we've been to the first quadrennial homeland security review and we've had sufficient oversight by congress, i think we would all agree. >> i concur spent what i would like each of the secretaries to do is comment on what i call the dhs enterprise. this is a term that is taken form or the last 24 months pars as a result of the first quadrennial defense review, tries to take a look at not only the departments role in terms of function where it's at, in relation to the original statutory mandates contained in home and secured act him and

follow on policy doctrines. and take a look at the broader issues that are confronting the homeland right now in relation to not only with the department does but the role of individuals, communities, the private sector, academia, our national lab, and the goal from that starting point after we have the additional discussion, just want to some current issues, including the current and developing threat environment. some of the challenges are laid out for structurally in governing related to interagency coordination cooperation and more specifically how the department and the home is a good enterprise interacts with the department of defense, particularly the defense support civilian authorities. there's been significant action taken place over the last two years for the council of governors, and i hope we can talk about that. i think would like to the secretaries give us their thoughts on the evolving threat

environment, as was the summer is in the opening remarks. we moved away from monolithic al qaeda, we're looking at all hazards and all threats coming, including weather, oil, whatever can cross state boundaries and create a national challenge. free much on the plate moving forward. following that i'd like to start focusing in on relationship between the department and our private sector partners. the homeland security and business council has done a great job in length out, i think the essential elements of where we were at and what has happened, not only to the nation but to the homeland security enterprise. but i think the questions that are left open we would like to kind of zero in at the end of this, are the things that we can do together. not only because the private sector owns so much griddle infrastructure, has such a lead role to play in cybersecurity, and having the means of production to solve a lot of

problems inside the government, but also how to solve the really complex problems that generate requirements that are well beyond the capacity of one individual organization in government to solve. we just have some very, very sensitive oversight activities, at least in my tenure, i think some conversation about how we need to collectively move forward the whole of government response to solve hard complex problems will be worthy of some discussion. and then finally just some comments on public-private partnerships. and i think that term is probably overused as much of some of the others were talked about earlier today. i think we need to move away from some general euphemisms like that and talk about what's really important in the private sector to look forward to your comments on that. so with that as a general overview, or a way forward but he first asks secretary ridge to make a couple comments about the day on the 24th of january when you walk into your office at 18th and she and just a couple that you have on the dhs enterprise moving forward. >> as you know we grew from that

one individual to about 180,000, 220, 225, 240. real quick if i might be able to set the stage my colleagues, i think it's important for the discussion, at least for potential frame of reference for all do is give you dhs really as a whole company. and on that day that we were assigned the responsibility to integrate people from about 20 plus different agencies and 108,000 people at the time, mergers, acquisitions, starters and the best teachers. all going on at the same time. and unlike the private sector we didn't have like a year and a half to do. i was sworn in on the 24th. by the way, the nash is the nashua city council showed up a couple days before march 1 and said we're going to go into iraq in a couple of weeks. you want to try to build infrastructure in case there's some blowback for terrorists. okay, not a problem, we will do it. so take that frame of reference

and you think about the following things. first of all, there were a couple principles we tried to embed and i think my colleagues have basically done the same thing and they really built upon a. because the first thing you know is that initial structure will have changes. i think one thing the three of us have demonstrated is the openness to change and the need just like the private sector for continuous improvement. the first iteration, the second intermission, the third iteration. the threat warning system is a great example. it initially start with ashcroft, ridge saying be aware, be alert, that have a good day. and we went to the color-coded system. we will downsize, we'll do it carefully because public messaging is a critical, critical feature of homeland security. the second in her ration, secretary chertoff took a look at that structure that was created and supported by the administration, took a look at past expand, breezed to an f. years and said i think there are

other ways we need to integrate some of these resources. couple quick thoughts. homeland security is a national mission, it's a federal agency, but you are really one of its biggest job is to integrate its capabilities with states, locals, academic and the private sector. i think we all agree on that. one of the principles i think what all agreed as you push her board out as far as you can, you want to secure, you want to make sure the goods are secured, you want to get information about people who come into the states, whether on a boat or flying an airplane. it's a national mission. you push a border out as far as you can. one of the biggest challenges we have, and my colleagues can comment on this was also a new culture. if america is a battleground, the culture of information sharing, homeland security the most effective it needs to share. not only needs to share horizontally within the federal government, but down at the states, the locals and police

chiefs and the like. that was a real challenge for us. i presume it's gotten better but think of as a tech look at a couple things that have happened, i still think there's plenty of room for improvement. while you're doing the business line integration, everybody had their own id, everybody had their own procurement, people with different budget what does, every h.r. differences, i think we've proven that we can choose a game plan in terms of policy. remember, i think this agency is subjected to more political scrutiny and pressure, the incident at the moment sometimes drives change, not necessary to change we would necessarily agree to. and then finally our challenge was at that time and up with my colleagues followed a very successfully, you do all these things, consistent with the american brand. you do it consistent with the rule of law, you to a consistent with the constitution of the united states. we start off with a big holding company and then you embed in your mind it needs to be continues improvement every step along the way, and i think my colleagues have demonstrated not

only their desire to do so but their ability to execute on an improvement. >> secretary chertoff? >> first let me say i was very lucky when i stepped into the job. after two years after the birth of department because tom had done a phenomenal job, outstanding from scratch. that's not to say it was completely mature, oddly still not completely mature. by way of reference if you go back to the department of defense i think most people would argue that between the department of defense being established in 1947 in goldwater-nichols can consider but afterwards, was a tremendous amount of maturation that took place in which most recent i think it was a tremendous precedents of osama bin laden of may issue. we we understood there was a lot of work and we had a great foundation. i would say from a high altitude standpoint there were three basic challenges.

one was to get within the department a culture of jointness, shared understanding, and shared execution. which is part of any organization, and particularly important when you're bringing in constituents from a lot of different agencies, some of which had varying degrees of enthusiasm about being put into a large institute. you know, speak he's been very mild. >> so there was that element. second of was the vertical. how do you coordinate with state and local governments and private sector? again, probably more than any other cabinet department and certain and more than other security departments, dod and justice. at the very heart of dhs's mission was having a robust relationship with state and local government and private sector. and a lot of the challenge there is in the fact that there is not a command and control relationship that operates on a

vertical basis. in fact, i used to get asked all the time, i'm sure tom did, i'm sure jan is, who's in charge. and the answer is in many cases there isn't any one person in charge. even the president's authority when it comes to matters that occurs domestically within state or locality is limited. and the governor's authority may be limited, so you really learn is a different culture. it's a culture coordination and how do you maximize teamwork. i used to say, you know, basically it's like a baseball. we might be the manager of the manager is not out in the field while play is going on saying to the shortstop threw the ball to the first baseman, and sang to the third baseman, cover the shortstop's position. what you're doing is your training and establishing the place up front and you're allowing them to take the field and use that information to operate in a coordinated fashion. so that was the second challenge. a third challenge was dealing with a set of expectations

people have about homeland security. that concept was a new concept. i grew up in the world where the defense department and the justice department have completely separate and distinct areas of authority to deal with security threats. you basically looked at a security issue, and if it was nominated a military issue, a matter of warmaking, then you had a set of entities that do with it, a set of authorities and a set of legal rules and processes. if it was a criminal issue, law enforcement, a different group of people, different set of authority, different set of laws. and there was very little over that. what homeland security has adopted was forced to grow up with was a world that does not fit into those categories. it's a world in which we are often using all of these tools to deal with threats. and which tools we use their in

particular situations. so we can have someone like bin laden who is both an indicted defendant, but was also somebody that was a known military target. and the need to bring together a department that embodies a new doctrine, and one that spans would use to fall very deeply within the jurisdiction of different federal organizations i think was a challenge in and of itself. i think one of the things we went through -- anyway, admiral alan was to try to build a strategy and a doctrine that takes a very, very different many of threats, one which you can be dealing with medical threats, biological threats, natural disasters, transnational criminal groups, smuggling, border security and terrorism, and sometimes align is not very clear where one ends and the other one begins. so these were ideas and next stage of building after the basic framework laid out by, and

i am happy to say i deeply we have matured the department over four years. soren hansen bums in the road. -- certainly had some bumps in the road. specular when there's a transition of authority in this country and whether presidential transition, there's a party that has been out of power, usually a cadre of folks or a cohort in academia or business in consulting or someplace, kind of waiting for their turn for that to happen again. the transition between the bush administration and the obama administration was the first transition to a new party for the cohort do not exist outside in those different areas. secretary napolitano will be moving to the discussion of the quadrennial homeland security review, maybe you could comment on the challenges associated with a party coming into didn't have the alumni group already out there. >> well, yeah, and first of all, you are a marvelo c